[normloman]

Um... Not work so hard?

I'm not a programmer, so I'm viewing the stuff on hacker news from outside the bubble, so to speak. And from here, y'all look crazy. To the average person, spending extra hours at work with no overtime pay is absurd, but you all discuss it like it's no big deal.

Your industry needs a huge cultural overhaul. People must be trained not to accept burnout as normal.

[sergiosgc]

There is another view. Programmers commonly have two characteristics that make them talk a lot about burnout:

a) They are analytical people. It comes with the job. You can't program if you don't think analytically, and this characteristic can't possibly be confined to work activities, so it gets ingrained into personality.

b) They like what they do. Naturally, this is not true for every individual, but is true for most. The reason is not that this is a paradise bubble. Much to the contrary: the profession is so taxing for individuals that don't like to code that it self selects "code lovers".

Individuals fitting this description know and actively quantify their productivity levels. They know that they perform better when everything is flowing, and they know when they're off their game. Thus, they are more prone to correctly identifying lower productivity on themselves, when compared to other professions. The result is more chatter about burnout.

This does not mean programmers burn out more than other professionals. It means programmers are more conscious of their own productivity.

[normloman]

The burnout problem is not just talk. When I hear people on HN brag that they regularly work through dinner, thats evidence that high burnout rates are real.

And programmer's personality traits are not solely to blame. It's the whole culture of tech, and tech companies. It's Google and Microsoft building these campuses with every amenity you'll ever need (so you never have to leave). It's VCs looking for young 20 somethings to make startups (because 20 somethings rarely have a spouse and kids to care for). It's all of us on HN acting like this it's ok.

[Huppie]

I'm going to agree with sergiosgc here.

Even though I work a relaxed 36 hour work week and rarely do anything work-related outside office hours I still encountered many of the issues related to burnout. I've wondered why for quite some time and this article pretty much nails where these feelings where coming from.

Fun fact: Even the process of interviewing at other companies seemed to help. Looking back, I think it's because most interview processes contain tests that required me to spend a few hours solving (complex) problems with code.

[potatolicious]

> "Much to the contrary: the profession is so taxing for individuals that don't like to code that it self selects "code lovers"."

I disagree with this part. I think this part is entirely a myth we've concocted for ourselves - we overtly select for "code lovers" with the predisposition that non-"code lovers" are incapable of handling the work.

I have never, ever, seen this proven out, but it's a common belief nonetheless. In general I think there's too much "we're so special, we elite few" in this industry.

Yeah, there's a level of achievement - like any other field - that's only possible if you're living and breathing code, but the vast majority of tech jobs - even senior, high-level tech jobs - don't require this.

[pconner]

HN self-selects "code lovers." It's easy to see that how the belief that this also applies to the industry can propagate here.

[seivan]

Funny how people assume long hours for software engineers is self-inflicted. I take it you guys don't have non engineering managers.

[cben]

For over a year I've been working at home (with a kid), on an open source thing with little prospect of financial return. I have many of burnout symptoms the article lists. I tell myself various reasons why I frequently work into the night, but one thing is certain: it's self-inflicted.

[FiatLuxDave]

I'm also coming from outside the bubble. From a different viewpoint, though, programmers aren't so bad about this. Try hanging out with some medical doctors and nurses, instead. I might think my 60 hour weeks are bad, but i just can't complain about it to my wife when she gets home from her 80 hour weeks. Burnout is a completely accepted part of nursing, and many nurses take it into account in career planning.

Not saying it isn't crazy also, just providing another perspective.

[ranran876]

I think it's a bit apples to oranges. Programming is for the most part sitting quietly in front of a computer screen for hours each day. At face value it looks easier, but it's actually a lot more brain-numbing. If I'm honest with myself, I think I can do it for 4 hours a day before my brain starts to slowly shutdown. I've been working for only a couple years and I'm seriously concerned about my future in the industry.

[rwallace]

I'll let you into a secret: four hours of concentrated, high-quality thinking a day is about the limit of what the rest of us can do as well. I don't know whether that's a human universal, but if there are exceptions, they are exceptional indeed. A programmer working eight hours a day is at best doing four hours of high-quality concentrated work and four hours of random crap like attending meetings, checking e-mail and reading HN.

In other words, don't worry about your future in the industry. You're doing fine.

[abduhl]

I've been noticing this type of thinking a lot on HN. It simply isn't true. I am not in the tech industry (if you search my comment history you'll find I do underground tunneling) but everybody I have interacted with at my firm that is above the junior level (and the majority of those at the junior level) puts in far more than 4 hours of concentrated, high-quality thinking a day.

Out of the normal 45 to 60 hours I work a week when I am doing design work, at least 75% of that time is spent doing high level thinking. I am not an anomaly in my firm.

I don't accept nor do I respect the idea that a person is only good for a couple of hours of high quality work to their employer per day.

[kybernetikos]

My understanding is that most studies suggest that working around the 60 hours per week mark results in diminished productivity compared to 40 hours per week after only about 3 weeks.

On the other hand, I think people who say that they are only able to get through 4 hours of work in a day, really specifically mean programming. And it's probably true in that limited sense, but all the other stuff - communicating with others so you know what program to write, helping others so they can work more effectively, is actually very valuable. It's just a common programmer failing to not really see that stuff as 'real work'. It's even worse as programmers get promotions and are expected to spend a significant amount of their time on management type activities.

[Smudge]

The trick is to make those 4 hours as productive as possible, so the rest of your day can be spent on more menial tasks. Finding the right balance comes with time and experience, so I wouldn't stress about it too much.

Sometimes people claim they can be productive for 8 or more hours per day, for weeks on end. But likely what's happening is they are tricking themselves into feeling (and looking) productive, while their actual productivity finds an equilibrium far below what it could be if they paced themselves.

[ranran876]

I guess it's nice to hear I'm not alone. Well unfortunately you need to fill in the other 4 hours in a way that doesn't leave you feeling inadequate - but you're right, it's something to work on.

If I had it my way, I'd work half time programming and half time working a public facing job.

[littleweep]

The nurses I know have schedules that cap at three 12-hour days per week (36 hours/week). What kind of nurses work 80 hours a week?

[bkjelden]

Demand can be very bursty for nursing.

My wife works in postpartum care, and while she usually works 3 12.5 hr shifts per week, if the hospital is going through a busy time it can be more. In addition to her normal scheduled hours, she will have a few on-call shifts per month, and during feb-april (usually the busiest time of year around here) it's pretty much assumed that she'll get called in for these. In addition to the scheduled on-call shifts it's usually not hard to find other times that the hospital is in need.

Of course even at that, I don't think she's ever worked more than like, 60 hrs a week. I can't imagine anyone working 80 hr weeks consistently in nursing. It doesn't even seem safe - nursing is very physically and mentally demanding work, someone consistently overworked is much more likely to make mistakes.

[arbitrage]

Likewise. My wife has now, and has had in the past at other nursing jobs, strict rules regarding overage time.

[sliverstorm]

There's a whole lot of different work schedules for nurses. I never knew until I started rubbing shoulders with a large number of them.

[gnopgnip]

Does that include any on call time?

[AnonJ]

Also ask Investment Banking people. From what I hear, they lead a life at least as busy as ours, and what's worse is that they often cannot control what urgent tasks are shoved into their faces.

I call the talk on "programmer working long hours" stereotype and myopia.

[kybernetikos]

Overworking doctors and nurses leads to mistakes that kill people. I think it's quite possible that programmer culture doesn't have a healthy attitude and that medical culture is even worse.

[codingdave]

I started to type up a reply about how burnout tends to be project-related, not the norm, but then the more I thought about it... the more your final statement seems 100% true. Why am I trying to rationalize burnout in this industry? Even if I can explain occasional pushes to complete a project, you are correct.

[cylinder]

I'm not a programmer, but I burnout from being bored and unsatisfied with my work, I even get burnt out from feeling like I'm not doing enough. If I'm doing something engaging and exciting I'm more than happy to work long hours.

[paulhauggis]

the problem is that there is really boring work in every project.

[logfromblammo]

One man's grind is another man's passion.

I'm usually the only one on any team that is willing to sit down with "that tool", written by some guy who left the company years ago (maybe using VBA Excel or Access macros because he wasn't actually a trained programmer), and understand it to the point that I can fix just one piece of it without rewriting the whole thing from scratch.

And then I can recommend ways to wean the company's process away from that sort of fragile dependence on unmaintainable code.

But that kind of work is not for everyone. A lot of the time, people don't even like the smell of the code they wrote themselves only a few months ago, so slogging down in the sewers of the ex-COO's magic Excel spreadsheet would be absolute torture. I see it less like an undercity diver busting up grease clots in the drains, and more like a surgeon carefully and methodically removing colon polyps before they go malignant.

And I am burning out here because I have been explicitly ordered to not fix anything without prior permission. Ordinarily, I would be spending some time every day safely refactoring old code and eliminating dead code. But SLoC is a management metric here. Reducing the total lines of code would upset the applecart.

[duderific]

> But SLoC is a management metric here. Reducing the total lines of code would upset the applecart.

God... what a horrifying situation. That seems like exactly the opposite of what management should be doing. I get satisfaction when I can refactor copy/paste, unparameterized code with something more concise and easily testable. I hope you find a better place to be soon.

[logfromblammo]

I have been at least keeping my eyes open for almost two years. I have worked here for almost two years. I recognized almost immediately that this was a dead end for me, so I just turned the resume burner down to simmer.

I already have a job, and it pays well enough, so even considering the poor working conditions, I haven't seen any offers that would entice me to leave it. I don't really want to work with professional 3rd-party recruiters, and more than once I have walked away from a company that wanted to start negotiating salary before even inviting me to interview.

If this were San Francisco or Silicon Valley, I would probably be gone by now. But quieter markets seem somewhat less eager to hire anyone with less than exactly five years of experience, and are very reticent about paying anything extra for older prospective employees.

Aside from the job itself, I am getting so, so sick of modern software industry hiring practices. It seems like every person in every HR department is constantly keeping secrets and monitoring possible lines of sight from any hidden lawsuit snipers.

[collyw]

But there doesn't have to be.

I built the database and web interface for my current workplace 3 years ago. We used Excel as a temporary quick fix for inputting data. Problem is, we are still using it 3 years later. I am constantly cleaning up the mess of crap data being in the database because of this. Its really tedious, and has generated far more work than replacing excel with some proper web form that properly validates the data. I never get a chance to build the web forms, as it will take a week or two to do it properly. Instead I spend my time on tedious boring crap, that I shouldn't have to do, because management doesn't see it as a problem, other than me complaining about it.

If something is boring, there is a good chance it can be automated somewhat.

[andyakb]

This misses the point of the article.

The author's premise is that you burnout because you do not spend time on the things that truly fulfill you, whatever those may be. It is very possible, and maybe even probable, that people who do not "work so hard" can still experience burn out because they do not use their free time to do the things that fulfill them.

If you are working so hard that you simply cannot find any time to fit in fulfilling activities, then yes, you should not work so hard.

If you are being taken advantage of and pressured into working too hard without adequate compensation, then you should find a better job.

However, "not work so hard" is not an answer to the problem as outlined by the author and seems more like a response to the headline than to the article itself.

[normloman]

I'm not missing the point of the article. I'm disregarding it. When you're working so hard that you burn out, we shouldn't be discussing how to mitigate the effects. Just stop working.

This author tries to pretend the cause of burnout is not too much work, but too much "unfufilling" work. As if working from morning till midnight is perfectly fine, as long as you convince yourself the code you write in this half-asleep state is making the world a better place (and not just lining the pockets of your boss). This is exactly the attitude the tech industry needs to erase.

Yes, programming can be fun, but everyone needs a break, even from fun things. Furthermore, having a fulfilling job doesn't mean your time is free.

[walkon]

Hours worked doesn't always contribute to burnout. I can easily feel burnout working 40 hour weeks filled with unsatisfying work (e.g. bureaucratic paperwork, interruptions for unimportant issues, unchallenging problems, etc). Conversely, if I am actually able to code and develop an application that is semi-interesting, I could easily go past 40 hours a week and not feel any burnout because it is fulfilling and/or enjoyable. I could also stay at 40 or a little below.

The key consideration is (perceived) fulfillment. Time spent is involved in determining this, but isn't the only variable - importance of work, enjoyment/satisfaction, sense of accomplishment, etc.

[normloman]

You're right. It's not just a matter of hours worked. Fufillment plays into it too. But even a job you love can burn out if you do it for too long. What's more, most of you consider programming a fulfilling career. So if you're burning out, it's probably due to your long hours. And we know programmers work long hours. So do the math.

[MadManE]

I can corroborate this. My last job was not very intense[0], but I still experienced burnout symptoms after a few months. After a while, I just hated going to work. I got a new job, and I was suddenly energized. I started staying late to work on things not because they were past due, but because I was interested in them. I found a sense of accomplishment and self-fulfillment in doing them.

[0] Typical 8-5, fairly laid-back atmosphere, significant amount of freedom.

[InclinedPlane]

You need to understand that software developers aren't like factory workers. The difference between a factory worker putting in 1500 hours of work in a year and 3000 hours of work in a year is maybe that 2x more widgets get made or something. It's easy to just get another shift of workers to come in and get the same total widgets made, no big deal. But software development isn't manufacturing, it's a creative, even artistic venture. Making software is like making a movie. The difference between working 1500 hours in a year and 3000 might be the difference between making "Sharknado" and "Citizen Kane", meaning, the difference between making an incredibly compelling product that has a huge social and economic impact or just some throwaway crap that will fade in relevance quickly over time.

Making great software tends to require extremely talented developers who are extremely engaged in their work. And that tends often to result in devs working long hours as a natural consequence, though that's often not strictly necessary to produce good results (despite what I said above, though it is often strongly correlated). Regardless of how many hours are put in, when there's a collision between the passion and engagement in the work from the individual on the one hand and the rewards, recognition, and guidance coming from management and the rest of the company the result can easily be burnout. Burnout can happen even if you're only working 20 hours a week, it's not about some trivial reaction due to overwork. It's about traumatic interpersonal experiences. It's about being engaged strongly and passionately and either being overused or misused.

Alternately, think about it in relationship terms. A passionate dev has fallen head over heels in love with the project their working on. So much so that they dedicate a lot of their life to it. If they don't see that love reciprocated, or if that love is used in service of an abusive or dysfunctional relationship then it will cause the individual significant emotional trauma and heartbreak which is manifested in the form of "burnout".

Again, burnout isn't necessarily overwork, it's the equivalent of heartache and emotional trauma in business relationships.

[kelukelugames]

My company actively encourages people to not over work. The CEO shot down a nap room because it implies people should stay longer.

[zz1]

> shot down a nap room because it implies people should stay longer

True! Smart move: did it work?

[kelukelugames]

No, instead we nap at our desks like real engineers!

Just kidding. :) This story re-affirmed my decision to join the company.

[mattmanser]

"Shot down" means that he said no, he dismissed the idea.

[rockdiesel]

By asking "did it work?", I think zz1 is asking if dismissing the nap room idea resulted in people not staying longer.

[zz1]

I misread "shut down" instead: thank you for correcting me. Still: people respond to incentives and turning down an idea like that and letting the employees know that… this is an incentive and it may have lead to some results. So the question still stands.

[ljnelson]

I'm in the bubble and you are absolutely dead on. My secret to avoiding burnout was to do contracting for four years. After this, and after going back to full-time work, I realized (at more than an intellectual level) for the first time that the more you work the less you make. Completely eye-opening.

Respect the 9-to-5 workday and good things will happen.

[programmarchy]

Curious how contracting helped you realize this. Did you work more or less hours while contracting? How did contract work help you avoid burnout?

[Swizec]

I have also found contracting is a good way to avoid burnout. The biggest difference is that there is a direct cost associated with hours worked and business owners readily feel the impact of asking you to work more.

When working on a day rate, you also have more power to say "My day is over, screw you." if they ask for more than their share.

Contracting is pretty sweet. The freedom gives you a lot of power.

[poulsbohemian]

Call it reaching for the brass ring. Tech is one of the few fields where fairly average people can get ahead and potentially move up the ladder. If my options are to burn out my body in the oil wells of South Dakota for a few years, or work hard at tech ventures over my whole career, the tech ventures have a better chance at a really big payout. Tech isn't perfect, and I'd agree there is a lot of problem with crazy hours and burn out, but it is also one of the few industries that is semi-meritocratic (so those long hours can pay off)

[driverdan]

Long hours may contribute to burnout but are not a cause in and of themselves. I tend to work less than 40h a week on my own terms and am still burned out right now.

[angersock]

After a nasty brush with burnout, I've been doing as much as I can to try and steer clear of it and overwork...and also to encourage my team to do the same.

It's a little tricky, because the "work work work" bug in your ear makes you feel like you should be putting in more cycles, but honestly the long-term get-shit-done factor is way better if you calmly plan and execute and take your time.

I just wish there were more people locally to compare notes with.

[greggman]

I program because I love it. It's my hobby. I quit my job a 14 months ago. 5 months ago I thought of an idea I wanted to pursue. I've been spending 8-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week on it since then.

I'm sorry you apparently picked a career you don't get real enjoyment from. Those of us that picked something we love don't see doing it a lot as a negative. We see it as just that, doing something we love.

[MrRage]

Good to hear that you're happy and your choices have worked out, sincerely. But kindly please consider the following points:

1. You may not have worked enough to burn out. If you're in your 20's you can work longer too. If you don't have a family you can work longer.

2. Not everyone can make the career choices you got to make. I do program and enjoy it but it's way to risky for me personally to quit my corporate job. Please consider you might have some privileges others don't have or less responsibilities than other people.

3. For those of us who toil in the corporate world, depending on the situation, it is just foolish to spend more than the required 40 hours (except for limited crunch time). Why should I slave away and get no reward? I get paid the same. Consider that corporation might take advantage of those who do enjoy programming to do more work for less.

Anyway I wish you all the luck on your idea. :)

[BSousa]

Let me know in 10 years, when you are 50 pounds heavier, have a distressed family life, stress, high blood pressure and back at a 9-5 doing crud apps for insurance companies how it feels then.

If we take the higher end of you statement (12*6) you are working 72 hours a week. Seriously, you aren't that productive (Studies show this) so you are just 'wasting' time anyway, if you don't have to be in an office to 'pretend' to work those hours, then get the fuck away from the screen

[rip747]

working on your own stuff for 8-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week is WAAAAY different then working 8-12 hours a day 5-6 days a week for someone else and not getting compensated. Your comparison is a complete miss.

[hack_edu]

Oh to be young again...

[greggman]

I'm 49

[oldmanjay]

You're getting voted down by people who assume that your experience can't possibly be real because it isn't their experience, but I feel the same as you.

There are dozens of us!

[praxulus]

I think the downvotes were triggered by this:

>I'm sorry you apparently picked a career you don't get real enjoyment from

Enjoying something for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, is definitely still "real enjoyment."

[MrRage]

I submit, as argued in my other comment, that greggman is the one assuming his/her experience should take priority.

If you are able to work years on end at 70 hours a week then more power to you. But that doesn't mean other people who do burn out are to blame or inferior b/c they didn't follow in greggman's footsteps or didn't choose "a career you don't get real enjoyment from".

Moreover, seriously consider this: Is working 72 hours for just 5 months enough to burn someone out? Especially if your young and responsibility free, wouldn't it take a lot longer?

[greggman]

You're reading a lot into my reply. I'm replying to the parent to my comment which was arguably judgemental in saying "y'all look crazy" and "spending extra hours at work with no overtime pay is absurd" and "Your industry needs a huge cultural overhaul"

My response is to that.

My response is even in line with the article this is linked about. That message paraphrased is "If you like what you're doing you won't get burnt out. If you're getting burnt out you're probably doing stuff you don't like doing."

I know plenty of other people in my camp. People with 2 or 3 kids that some how manage to find time to code and learn new tech after work because they just love it. As concrete examples, one of them is designing 3D software to generate STL files for 3D parts so he can design toys for his kids. Another just got both an Amazon Fire and has already created one tiny app on it and now just got his Oculus Rift 2 and is playing with it. How he finds the time with three kids I have no idea but he posts is progress regularly on his FB.

If you don't want to work a lot I have no issues with that. What I have issue with is people calling me "..crazy" for doing something I enjoy. If you don't enjoy it fine. Do something else. If I enjoy it let me enjoy it!

[normloman]

You're not crazy for doing what you love. You're crazy for thinking you can cram in every single thing that you love, plus rest, eating, and excercise, into one day, and not collapse at some point.

"How he finds the time with three kids I have no idea but he posts is progress regularly on his FB."

Maybe he doesn't find the time.

[rhizome]

Is the thing you love supporting you financially?

[mkal_tsr]

> I'm not a programmer

and

> Your industry needs a huge cultural overhaul

aka, "I don't have your perspective but let me tell you why you're all wrong"

[Loughla]

aka, "I don't have your perspective, so here's an outsider's point of view." Don't be so confrontational about it. OP wasn't confrontational, merely pointing out what seems to be a terrifying part of your culture from the outside. The fact that avoiding burnout is a regular topic on HN is very telling.

You don't honestly believe that burnout is a natural part of working, do you?

[mkal_tsr]

I think it's systemic of not having a plan in place to appropriately deal with a creative job.

And my point which was missed was that making broad generalizations about an entire industry with zero personal experience is irrational. I don't tell lawyers their culture is shit because it's not a single culture, it all depends on the industry, the individuals involved, internal structure and more. But sure, let's take an entire profession and just make blanket generalizations about it!

[logfromblammo]

I am a programmer. My industry does need a huge cultural overhaul.

But I also know that my co-workers and I have shared personality traits that make such an overhaul extremely unlikely, especially given the shared personality traits of those whom we typically serve.

The traditional manner in which workers overhaul their own industry is via cartelization and collective action. And to us, that just seems like trading in kings and getting back a tsar. We think the cartel enforcer would immediately turn on us, because we all know both game theory and history, and it totally would.

But we're still stuck at that Nash equilibrium, where all of us get a little bit screwed, because any attempt to get less screwed would make you more screwed.

I'm not going to propose a solution here. I'm just saying that it should be readily apparent to anyone, not just an insider, that we need to seek a new equilibrium.

[mkal_tsr]

Not disagreeing with anything you said :-)

My underlying thinking in what I said is due to massive generalizations that are so common today. When people say, "the tech industry is sexist" I understand that what they're saying is rooted in fact with hard-evidence and examples, but and this is the key, by making these sweeping generalizations it discredits those who are actively making an effort to solve these sort of problems.

So then usually the response is, "well I didn't mean every one, just those that are the causing issue" to which I like to point out how in the push to be PC and equalize everything, they are not policing their own words in the same manner that they police other people's words, for if that was the case, they would say, "some groups and subcultures within the tech industry are sexist" Generally speaking, when I see someone use "all" "everyone" or lack a modifier like "some" or "subgroup" I try to point out the absurdity of it.